Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
torob-mcp

torob-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Similar products

tb_similar
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find products Torob lists as similar alternatives in the same class, including their cheapest price and shop count.

Instructions

Products Torob shows as similar (alternatives in the same class), with cheapest price and shop count.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "product": "<product>"
    },
    "name": "tb_similar"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
productYesProduct id (UUID) or torob.com product URL.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Removed value: -"Rows to return (default 15, max 50)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / product / description
      Previous value: -"Product id (the UUID from search cards, e.g. '57ea65ae-0798-4cd0-96a7-38d8af180345'), a '/p/<id>/...' path or a full torob.com product URL."New value: +"Product id (UUID) or torob.com product URL."
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the shape of the result (cheapest price plus shop count per alternative), but says nothing about how many results come back, what the default limit implies, or what happens for a product with no similar items.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and returned fields come first. It is efficient and readable, though the parenthetical gloss could have been spent on usage routing instead.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter read-only lookup with annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and result fields adequately. It is incomplete on the one thing an agent must decide unaided: when to reach for this over tb_variants, tb_compare, or tb_cheapest, and how the limit affects results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%: the 'product' parameter is documented in-schema as a UUID or torob.com URL, but 'limit' carries no description beyond type and 1-50 bounds. The description mentions neither parameter, so it does not compensate for the undocumented limit or clarify whether the shop count/price apply per alternative.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the resource precisely: products that Torob classifies as similar, explicitly glossed as 'alternatives in the same class', and the returned fields (cheapest price, shop count). It is clear what the tool retrieves, though it never contrasts itself with nearby siblings such as tb_product, tb_variants, or tb_compare.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent must infer from the word 'similar' that this is the right call versus tb_variants (different variants of one product) or tb_compare (side-by-side comparison), with no help from the description.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools